|
|
|
|
|
by clubm8
2690 days ago
|
|
>We call it "dark matter" because our formulas give the right prediction if we add a lot of mass where we see none, that is, if we assume there is some matter there that does not emit or interact with light. I'm not a physics expert so forgive me if this is a naive take, but could black holes just sitting around, too far from other objects to have a visible effect, account for this unaccounted mass? IIRC they're small in size but incredibly heavy, and if space is infinite then they could just be sitting around taking up mass. |
|
edit: I should add that they can't be regular black holes formed from stars, because then they'd have the same distribution of the stars in the galaxy they formed. While the the stars in a galaxy are most numerous near the center and get less numerous away from the center, the mass we have to insert in the form of dark matter to make the equations add up has to be evenly spread from the center and far beyond the visible edge of the galaxy.
The problem with this primordial black hole idea is that having lots of such black holes about would leave a very tell-tale signature thanks to gravitational lensing, which would be very strong near the event horizon. So far, no searches have found this.
Here's one news article describing the results of a recent search: https://physicsworld.com/a/supernovae-reveal-that-primordial...
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_black_hole